ArticleJapanese journal of radiology2016
Coronary artery calcium score and CT angiography in asymptomatic elderly patients with high pretest probability for coronary artery disease.
Article in Japanese journal of radiology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- TBS Predict Coronary Artery Calcification in Adults.BioMed research international · 2016Article
- Association of bone mineral density and trabecular bone score with cardiovascular disease.Tzu chi medical journalReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo evaluate the role of coronary artery calcium scoring (CACS) and/or coronary CT angiography (CCTA) in asymptomatic elderly patients with high pretest probability for coronary artery disease (CAD). MATERIALS AND
methodsForty-eight consecutive asymptomatic elderly (>65 years) subjects who had a high pretest probability and underwent CACS/CCTA were included. Each CCTA was evaluated for adequacy for assessment of coronary stenosis. Significant stenosis (>50% diameter narrowing) was assessed on evaluable CT images and by invasive catheter angiography (ICA).
resultsAll subjects were men with mean CACS of 880 ± 1779. Among those with low (0-99), intermediate (100-399), and high (400-999) CACS, ICA-verified significant stenosis was present in 8% (1/13), 23% (2/13), and 67% (8/12), respectively. Among those with very high CACS (≥ 1000) (n = 10), 90% of CCTAs were not evaluable for stenosis.
conclusionIn asymptomatic elderly subjects with high pretest probability, CACS followed by CCTA may be considered for those with intermediate to high CACS.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.